• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

调整社会风险因素的质量衡量标准可以促进医疗保健的公平性。

Adjusting Quality Measures For Social Risk Factors Can Promote Equity In Health Care.

机构信息

David R. Nerenz (

J. Matthew Austin is an assistant professor at the Johns Hopkins Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, in Baltimore, Maryland.

出版信息

Health Aff (Millwood). 2021 Apr;40(4):637-644. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2020.01764.

DOI:10.1377/hlthaff.2020.01764
PMID:33819097
Abstract

Risk adjustment of quality measures using clinical risk factors is widely accepted; risk adjustment using social risk factors remains controversial. We argue here that social risk adjustment is appropriate and necessary in defined circumstances and that social risk adjustment should be the default option when there are valid empirical arguments for and against adjustment for a given measure. Social risk adjustment is an important way to avoid exacerbating inequity in the health care system.

摘要

使用临床风险因素对质量指标进行风险调整已被广泛接受;使用社会风险因素进行风险调整仍存在争议。在此,我们认为在特定情况下,社会风险调整是合理且必要的;并且,当针对特定指标存在支持和反对调整的有效实证论据时,社会风险调整应作为默认选项。社会风险调整是避免加剧医疗体系不公平的重要途径。

相似文献

1
Adjusting Quality Measures For Social Risk Factors Can Promote Equity In Health Care.调整社会风险因素的质量衡量标准可以促进医疗保健的公平性。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2021 Apr;40(4):637-644. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2020.01764.
2
A New Vision for Quality and Equity.质量与公平的新愿景。
Ann Intern Med. 2020 Jan 21;172(2 Suppl):S64-S65. doi: 10.7326/M19-3896.
3
Prioritizing the perceived equity of the residents to construct an equitable health care system: evidence from a national cross-sectional study in China.优先考虑居民的公平感,构建公平的医疗保健系统:来自中国全国横断面研究的证据。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Mar 4;20(1):167. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-5026-9.
4
Outcome measurement in HEDIS: can risk adjustment save the low birth weight measure?医疗效果数据和信息集(HEDIS)中的结果测量:风险调整能否挽救低出生体重测量指标?
Health Serv Res. 2000 Dec;35(5 Pt 3):72-85.
5
Intersectional equity in health care: assessing complex inequities in primary and secondary care utilization by gender and education in northern Sweden.卫生保健中的交叉公平性:评估瑞典北部性别和教育在初级和二级保健利用方面的复杂不公平现象。
Int J Equity Health. 2020 Sep 11;19(1):159. doi: 10.1186/s12939-020-01272-7.
6
Association of Social Determinants With Children's Hospitals' Preventable Readmissions Performance.社会决定因素与儿童医院可预防再入院绩效的关联。
JAMA Pediatr. 2016 Apr;170(4):350-8. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.4440.
7
How Equity-Oriented Health Care Affects Health: Key Mechanisms and Implications for Primary Health Care Practice and Policy.公平导向的医疗保健如何影响健康:关键机制及其对初级医疗保健实践和政策的影响。
Milbank Q. 2018 Dec;96(4):635-671. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12349. Epub 2018 Oct 22.
8
Risk adjustment for pediatric quality indicators.儿科质量指标的风险调整
Pediatrics. 2004 Jan;113(1 Pt 2):210-6.
9
Proactive Strategies to Address Health Equity and Disparities: Recommendations from a Bi-National Symposium.应对健康公平与差异的积极策略:双边研讨会的建议
J Am Board Fam Med. 2018 May-Jun;31(3):479-483. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2018.03.170299.
10
Scoping review: national monitoring frameworks for social determinants of health and health equity.范围审查:健康的社会决定因素和健康公平性的国家监测框架
Glob Health Action. 2016 Feb 5;9:28831. doi: 10.3402/gha.v9.28831. eCollection 2016.

引用本文的文献

1
A Scoping Review and Assessment of the Area-Level Composite Measures That Estimate Social Determinants of Health Across the United States.对美国估计健康社会决定因素的地区层面综合指标的范围审查与评估
Public Health Rep. 2025 Jan-Feb;140(1):67-102. doi: 10.1177/00333549241252582. Epub 2024 Jun 19.
2
Applying Implementation Science to Advance Electronic Health Record-Driven Learning Health Systems: Case Studies, Challenges, and Recommendations.运用实施科学推进电子病历驱动的学习型健康系统:案例研究、挑战和建议。
J Med Internet Res. 2024 Oct 7;26:e55472. doi: 10.2196/55472.
3
The reliability and validity of lung cancer and melanoma clinical quality survival measures.
肺癌和黑色素瘤临床质量生存测量的可靠性和有效性。
Health Serv Res. 2023 Oct;58(5):1131-1140. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.14164. Epub 2023 May 12.
4
Adjustment for Social Risk Factors in a Measure of Clinician Quality Assessing Acute Admissions for Patients With Multiple Chronic Conditions.在衡量临床医生质量时对社会风险因素进行调整,以评估患有多种慢性病患者的急性入院情况。
JAMA Health Forum. 2023 Mar 3;4(3):e230081. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2023.0081.
5
Association of Insurance Type With Inpatient Surgery 30-Day Complications and Costs.保险类型与住院手术 30 天内并发症和费用的关联。
J Surg Res. 2023 Feb;282:22-33. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2022.09.006. Epub 2022 Oct 13.
6
Social Risk Adjustment In The Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program: A Systematic Review And Implications For Policy.医院再入院率降低计划中的社会风险调整:系统评价及对政策的启示。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2022 Sep;41(9):1307-1315. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2022.00614.
7
Association Between Self-reported Health-Related Social Needs and Acute Care Utilization Among Older Adults Enrolled in Medicare Advantage.报告的与健康相关的社会需求与参加医疗保险优势计划的老年人急性护理利用之间的关联。
JAMA Health Forum. 2022 Jul 8;3(7):e221874. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2022.1874. eCollection 2022 Jul.
8
Adjusting for Patient Economic/Access Issues in a Hypertension Quality Measure.调整高血压质量测量中的患者经济/可及性问题。
Am J Prev Med. 2022 Nov;63(5):734-742. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2022.05.011. Epub 2022 Jul 21.
9
Social risk adjustment in the hospital readmission reduction program: Pitfalls of peer grouping, measurement challenges, and potential solutions.医院再入院率降低计划中的社会风险调整:同侪分组的陷阱、衡量挑战及潜在解决方案。
Health Serv Res. 2023 Feb;58(1):51-59. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.13969. Epub 2022 Mar 19.
10
Health Equity: The Only Path Forward for Primary Care.健康公平:初级保健的唯一出路。
Ann Fam Med. 2022 Mar-Apr;20(2):175-178. doi: 10.1370/afm.2789. Epub 2022 Feb 14.